Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/273,561

Methods and Systems for Concentrating a Gas Sample

Final Rejection §102§112§Other
Filed
Jul 21, 2023
Examiner
RAEVIS, ROBERT R
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Mecanique Analytique Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
1543 granted / 1857 resolved
+15.1% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
73 currently pending
Career history
1930
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
41.2%
+1.2% vs TC avg
§102
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
§112
37.2%
-2.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1857 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112 §Other
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 58-62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. As to claim 58, what structure/step allow for circulating after heating? Nothing is apparent in either the drawings or specification. There are no examples, no reference, no direction on experimentation. What is one of ordinary skill to turn? As to REMARKS, consider: As to the last paragraph of p. 7; circulating suggests fluid flowing in a loop. Figure 2 does not suggest such. For now, there is nothing that provides for circulating. Claims 56-80 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. As to claim 56, that phrase “chromatographic method” (line 11) remains problematic. Consider that the definition provided on lines 13-18 of p., 8 of Remarks filed 1/8/26 started well, but then lines 11-13 of p. 8 confused such by expressly including detector, valve, column, analytical system, device and “other” components into the phrase “chromatographic method”. As such, what does the “chromatographic method” mean? Is it strictly functional steps, or steps that employ the listed components, or even a collection of both? The phrase “chromatograph method” needs to be defined so that one of ordinary skill may know what this claim is limited to. Such need be done to know the metes and bounds of this claim might be. Even the box marked “Chromatographic Method” (Figure 16) adds confusion because such shows only an oven and detector, as one of ordinary skill may then come to the mistaken conclusion that the Chromatographic Method comprises the step of using a column! (Not all chromograph methods include all of the listed steps and/or structure on p. 8 (of Remarks), while some systems may only have a separator. (Note: That phrase “to release the concentrated gas sample contained in the sample loop in a chromatographic method” is difficult grasp, as clarifying statements for its meaning are much uncertain. Also, a method (ex “chromatographic method”) without a step is inherently troubling because; consider that as there is no step, there is no method.1 As to claim 69, lines 10-13 are indefinite for the same reasons as provide in claim 56 immediately above. As to claim 69, how might a sample loop outlet be “connected to the chromatograph method” (last 2 lines), as a method is not structure. As to claim 80, the last 4 lines of the claim are indefinite for the same reasons as provide in claim 56 immediately above. As to claim 80, how might a sample loop outlet be “connected to the chromatograph method” (last line), as a method is not structure. Claim(s) 56-66,68,80 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by KR 20080056357. As to claim 56,61,63,68,80 Kim teaches a method for concentrating a gas sample, the method comprising: preparing a concentrated gas sample from a non-concentrated gas sample with a trap 14, the trap having a gas outlet (adject element13, Figure 2b) and enclosing an internal volume; controlling a temperature of the internal volume of the trap to reach a release temperature (temperature control 15, heater wire 17; Figure 1); injecting the concentrated gas sample in a sample line towards a sample loop PNG media_image1.png 310 426 media_image1.png Greyscale , the sample loop having a sample loop inlet and a sample loop outlet PNG media_image2.png 340 596 media_image2.png Greyscale , the sample line and sample loop being at a sub-atmospheric pressure (supply unit 30 draws the sample towards the supply by serving as a vacuum source:; and operating the sample loop to release the concentrated gas sample contained in the sample loop in a chromatographic method PNG media_image3.png 382 508 media_image3.png Greyscale , wherein the trap is not in line with the chromatographic method PNG media_image4.png 300 698 media_image4.png Greyscale ,_ wherein: the sample line is connected to the gas outlet of the trap and the sample loop inlet of the sample loop PNG media_image5.png 424 716 media_image5.png Greyscale ; and the sample loop outlet of the sample loop is connected to the chromatographic method PNG media_image6.png 296 580 media_image6.png Greyscale . . As to claims 57,58, heating from control 15 and heating wire 17 allows for such. As to claim 59, the device is employed again and again, thus the trap is flushed. As to claim 60, isolation is apparent at Figure 4b (after Figure 2a). As to claim 62, pressure is adjusted, suggestive of measuring. PNG media_image7.png 100 662 media_image7.png Greyscale As to claims 64,65, the Reference releases as a pulse as much as claimed. As to claim 66, the device is cleaned: “The device is cleaned by draining the sample together”. “As described above, when one type of sample is removed, distributed, and analyzed, and another sample is to be analyzed, the previous sample remaining in the apparatus of the present invention should be washed. In this case, the second control valve ( When the carrier gas is sent into the second control valve 40 in a state in which 40) is switched to the position shown in FIG. 2D, the carrier gas is discharged through the second control valve 40 and the loops 50 and 51 in order. The device is “cleaned” draining the sample together.” As to REMARKS, consider: As to the last paragraph of p. 7; circulating suggests fluid flowing in a loop. Figure 2 does not suggest such. For now, there is nothing that provides for circulating. As to the second to last paragraph of p. 9; the Reference’s sample line is as much a “line” as claimed. As to the second to last paragraph of p. 9; “directly” is not in claims. Also, Para 99 (Pub) describes what the term “connection” means. As to the last paragraph of p. 9; this paragraph does not distinguish the claim from the Reference. As to pp 10 and 11; the Reference teaches every claim limitation. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT R RAEVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2204. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8am to 4pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina DeHerrera, can be reached at telephone number 303-297-4237. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice. /ROBERT R RAEVIS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 1 Undersigned consider the possibility that the - - chromatographic method include operating the sample loop to release the concentrated gas sample - -, but could not make sense of such giving that “Chromatographic Method” box in the upper left-hand corner of Figure 16.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 21, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112, §Other
Jan 08, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112, §Other (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601853
MULTI-FUNCTIONAL MEASURING INSTRUMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601304
ANOMALY DETERMINATION DEVICE FOR INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597647
GAS ANALYSIS DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590862
DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR INDUCING AUTOMOTIVE BODY VIBRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584742
METHOD FOR CORRECTING THE MEASUREMENT FROM A VIBRATING ANGULAR INERTIAL SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+15.6%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1857 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month